Javier Solana was EU High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy, Secretary-General of NATO, and Foreign Minister of Spain. He is currently President of the ESADE Center for Global Economy and Geopolitics, Distinguished Fellow at the Brookings Institution, and a member of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Council on Europe.

“But there have also been signs suggesting that those who uphold these principles have not lost the will to fight back.”

I hope someone else reads that quote.

And if no ONE has even read my latest bit, I am adding some links. They are little hooks for something to like nibble on.

Pretend this is a test, and this section is Question 1. This is not an easy question. It may take some time to solve. The first answer is not always the solution.

1. What do a, and b, have in common?

a. Here’s what I get when I look up the word-“willpower” https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-ab&q=willpower

b. Here’s a news article on CNN that either I found, or IT found me: https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/01/asia/india-kerala-chain-intl/index.html

2. Here’s a morsel that I found in Mozilla’s POCKET- the first one on the left side of (guess) a hole in a net. You need to determine the difference between the PRO and CON of specific websites, and hurry up, the clock is ticking. You don’t have much time.

a. https://getpocket.com/explore/item/against-willpower

b. http://nautil.us

c. https://www.about.greatnonprofits.org

Take a break, and read this now: Maybe there really isn’t anything to worry about. Who cares where any money comes from, who cares where any money goes?

All of what you are reading now will help to solve Problem 1.

Who needs a will? Who needs will power? BTW, just what is the neural significance of one of the most-saved, read and shared stories on Pocket by Dr. Carl Erik Fisher? Hey, it’s got 21,198 saves, if they’re legit statistics. And how does anyone know what kind of STUFF that I, or anybody else saves?Who can save what? Remember all of this next section refers to problem 1. Right?

We better remember 2018 for what it was NOT. The following link is NOT for entertainment or marketing purposes. What’s your take-away, after reading the two links, if you do read them. Warning- Extreme complex digestible material:

If you’re brain isn’t fried, and you know that you are really an egg, AND, for anybody who is searching for the truth, here’s a little bit:

Of all the most significant sentences that have been written, and disseminated in any form, by any entity of any sort of operational or functional application of any segment of any phase of any activity of any telecommunication system on any platform worldwide during 2018, one wasn’t.

let's get real things things will only get better when you take out the chinese communists, their lackeys in moscow and the like. it takes two to tango, you can't expect unilateral action on supporting democracy, rule of law and multilateralism to work for achieving world peace when the other side could care less about them

Every President since Reagan has started a new war, with attacks on a country that has not attacked the US. Until Trump. Furthermore, Trump is pulling the US out of Syria, and looks like he might be the first President with the guts to accept defeat in Afghanistan and withdraw, with whatever face-saving terms we can get. I think this is good, for the US and for the world.

Exactly how has Trump contributed -- "one way or another" -- to the advance of populism around the world?

Until internationalist elites, in the US and around the world, seriously evaluate their failures over the past 20 years and amend their policy proposals, politicians who ride the wave of populist upset will continue to enjoy electoral success.

Trump didn't create a populist wave in the US -- he just accurately diagnosed the mood of a large portion of the electorate, squeaking out a presidential win against a deeply flawed candidate.

Mr Solana -- when you are at Davos, perhaps you can kick-start a conversation around any of the following:

1. An integrated European Union, where a portion of the members chose to share a currency without having any of the institutional prerequisites to making this a success.

2. A "free trade regime" that has created dramatic trade imbalances that are economically destabilizing, both within the Euro zone and beyond.

3. Open borders immigration policies that create a thriving business opportunity for those who traffic in illegal immigration and destabilize the cultures of once-thriving "Western" nation-states.

4. Pro-democracy military interventions in the Middle East that have been spectacular failures, costing America and its Nato allies trillions of dollars and thousands of lives, only to create unbelievable chaos for the recipients of these good intentions.

5. Continued tax evasion and corruption by wealthy elites and organized crime due to the failure to regulate a global financial system in a manner that ensures banks don't shelter wealth from law enforcement and taxing authorities.

Populism is a reaction to a quarter-century of failure of the proponents of multilateralism and multiculturalism to improve the lives of the middle class and working poor in once prosperous industrialized nations.

I' restrict my comment to Europe, where the author has been a prominent force in designing and building the dysfunctional mess that we have with the EU, the Euro-currency area, and even with the European wing of Nato.

The European wing of Nato is far too dependent on the USA because European politicians have not set the priorities right for some 25 years. Where we are in 2018 is the result of that. The common currency had been incompletely designed since the Maastricht Treaty. Although there was plenty of time to strengthen the basic structure before the currency was actually implemented, again it just was not done since the politicians of the time found it inconvenient, and/or were simply too ignorant to approach it. Even the financial crisis of 2008 and ff. did not result in lasting structural improvements and was merely batched up with band-aid and with flooding liquidity through the ECB. Anybody who can read a central bank balance sheet, ECB and national central banks, can easily see how problems were 'solved' by piling up government debt papers. The constitutional and institutional structure of the EU is still designed in a way as if EU-27 could ever be a federal state with a central parliament and a central government. It borders an epochal, historic crime to maintain this erroneous illusion, since most difficulties and controversies arise from the dysfunctional structure and the never ending battles for power and money above the heads of those who genuinely own the power - the people and their parliaments. Not their employed hands in government who have no business whatsoever to 'delegate' sovereign powers, which they do not own, on a permanent basis to non-elected functionaries appointed by themselves and positioned outside of any real parliamentary control and the reach by voters. Without structural reforms the EU is doomed, and those who refuse to approach the structural reforms in an honest way and with respect for the democratic rights of the people, will be responsible for the failure.

How you dare to pontificate on democracy and rule of law, Mr. Solana, when your country Spain is aligned with Turkey and Russia in oppression and jailing of political dissidents, like the speaker of the Catalan Parliament , civil activists and exiles. Shame on you.

Liberal democracy as practiced nowadays is built on a sandy beach. Misconceived and not unstable by nature. In short, too many Western thinkers have thrown away the self-cultivation baby with the Christianity bath water.

As a blue print to achieve good life, for an individual and/or for a society, "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is not working in the age of global information. "Life, self cultivation, and the pursuit of happiness" or the Confucian way is a far better approach to secure good life.

but it really isn't. Liberal democracies are superior in every way to kind of political society you advocate for, which is fascist. What this guy would be a good start for you to see why: "America makes Chinese Americans, but China does not -- and does not particularly want to -- make American Chinese. (https://www.cnn.com/2014/03/05/opinion/liu-china-gary-locke-slur/index.html)

"China this year eliminated presidential term limits, raising fears that President Xi Jinping’s so-called new era will end the period of collective leadership". Rubbish. 'President' is a largely ceremonial title in China. His substantive roles, Chairman of the Military Commission and Party General Secretary carry no term limits.

His power has not changed since his accession, either. He must still get unanimous agreement from five colleagues, none of whom he appointed or can dismiss. Only THEN can he can send legislation to Congress, which can (and does) delay it for up to ten years.

Deng Xiaoping’s reforms were not a corrective to Mao’s cult of personality. Mao's era was the time of China's modern political, agricultural and industrial revolutions. Starting with an industrial base smaller than that of Belgium's in the 50s, the China that for so long was ridiculed as "the sick man of Asia" emerged at the end of the Mao period as one of the six largest industrial producers in the world.

National income grew five-fold over the 25-year period 1952-78, increasing from 60 billion to over 300 billion yuan, with industry accounting for most of the growth. On a per capita basis, the index of national income (at constant prices) increased from 100 in 1949 (and 160 in 1952) to 217 in 1957 and 440 in 1978.

Over the last two decades of the Maoist era, from 1957 to 1975, China's national income increased by 63 percent on a per capita basis during this period of rapid population growth, more than doubling overall and the basic foundations for modern industrialism were laid and outpacing every other development takeoff in history.

In Germany the rate of economic growth 1880-1914 was 33 percent per decade.

In Japan from 1874-1929 the rate was 43 percent.

The Soviet Union over the period 1928-58 the rate was 54 percent.

In China over the years 1952-72 the decadal rate was 64 percent.

Bear in mind that, save for limited Soviet aid in the 1950s, repaid in full and with interest by 1966, Mao's industrialization proceeded without benefit of foreign loans or investments–under punitive embargoes the entire 25 years–yet Mao was unique among developing country leaders in being able to claim an economy burdened by neither foreign debt nor internal inflation.

but it isn't garbage. You contradicted yourself when you pointed out how Xi is also Chairman of the Military Commission and Party General Secretary. Which he can only be because he the president. Of course all of this is just pseudo-intellectual claptrap because none of this even matters since communist run china is under single party rule

It is odd that writers from Western nations frequently invoke Deng to rebuke Xi as if they know Deng or the Chinese people well. Do they? Where is their evidence that Chinese people are in general not happy about Xi?

Western - led globalization worked very well for Western powers plus Japan, for decades. However nowadays most growth goes to other Asian countries, Arabs, the financial elite ... and women. I can't find solutions in Mr. Solana article.

New Comment

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.